Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Has Thomas Gaksch become co-author of Fruit?

Author: Bryan Hofmann

Date: 10:44:19 06/18/05

Go up one level in this thread

On June 18, 2005 at 13:22:58, Gabor Szots wrote:

>On June 18, 2005 at 13:11:27, Bryan Hofmann wrote:
>>On June 18, 2005 at 11:30:05, Gabor Szots wrote:
>>>An excerpt from the readme of the new Fruit:
>>> "added PV-node extensions (this is from Toga), e.g. extending
>>>  recaptures only at PV nodes.  Not sure if these extensions help; if
>>>  they do, we all need to recognise Thomas Gaksch's contribution to
>>>  the community!"
>>>In my opinion it does not matter whether they help. In my interpretation Fabien
>>>uses something Thomas invented or something from his code. The same what Thomas
>>>did (only to much less extent).
>>>This adds to the confusion and controversion. What do we have now: two engines
>>>or two personalities? Or more? Fruit 2.1 based on Toga II based on Fruit 2.0?
>>>Ridiculous. The whole GPL is ridiculous.
>>Why, do you want to follow the teachings of only one mind. GPL uses the concept
>>that more then one brain is better the a single brain.
>Does GPL also use the concept that one code is better than starting from

Reinventing the wheel from scratch makes no sense.

>>Would you call Crafty this? Crafty uses EGTB's like many other programs and that
>>chunk of code was written by Nalimov.
>Did Nalimov write that code for his own fun only or also for use in chess

As far as I know Fabien and Thomas wrote their code for fun as there is no
charge for the program. There are other snippets of code in Crafty like the
Futility pruning that were not written by Hyatt yet I have not seen you complain
about this...

>>>Maybe Fabien intended to implement these PV-node extensions anyway. Thomas did
>>>it _for him_ (!) and now Fabien has to refer to Thomas otherwise he would be a
>>>I can only recommend to all authors not to publish their source code. At least
>>>not if their engine plays too well. Maybe it is too late.
>>There are and have been several chess engines that were written with more then
>>one individual involved. I fail to see any reasoning behind this statement.
>Those individuals deliberately chose one another for a joint venture.

And that is the whole point of GPL if you would just take the time to understand

This page took 0.01 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.